3 ms·
The point is not about "someone may not err" but about "someone may err", or more precisely "someone WILL err", coupled with the effects of such mistakes. Fail
by natmaka 1y ago
The point is not about "someone may not err" but about "someone may err", or more precisely "someone WILL err", coupled with the effects of such mistakes.
Failing to correctly design, build, exploit or maintain a wind turbine or solar panel isn't a big deal. Failing to do so on a nuclear reactor can become a huge and lasting disaster for many.
- mpweiher 1y agoWind turbines cause more deaths than nuclear reactors. Fact.
- natmaka 1y agoIt depends upon nuclear accident victims' estimation one choses to consider. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl:_Consequences_of_the_Catastrophe_for_People_and_the_Environment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl:_Consequences_of_the... Moreover pretending that the words nuclear accident is not more dangerous than the worst wind turbine accident will be difficult.
- mpweiher 1y agoYou are making the very common "mistake" of comparing 1 nuclear accident with 1 wind turbine accident. And are completely missing that you need a LOT more wind turbines, and these have a lot more accidents. For example, wind turbine accidents killed 14 people just in one year, 2011. How many people were killed in the UK in nuclear accidents that year? That decade. Ladder accidents kill ~80 people per year in Germany. Google "avilability bias"
- natmaka 1y agoThe various estimations of "victims of nuclear" also neglect victims from such accidents. In 2011 2 workers died while working to build the new EPR in Flamanville, and aren't officially (nor AFAIK anywhere) counted as nuclear victims.